# data[].attributes.body
Who was involved?
- Steven Dewayne Bond
- Cesar Cantu
- the United States Supreme Court

Where did it happen?
- Texas, near the Mexican boarder
- On a bus that was being checked for immigration status

Why was Bond searched?
- Cesar Cantu squeezed the overhead luggage of the bus Bond was on and felt Bond's suitcase

When was the Case?
- Argued: Feb 29, 2000
- Decided: Apr 17, 2000

What was the outcome?
The United States Supreme Court ruled that Cantu was violating Bond's 4th Amendment right when he manipulated his luggage.

# data[].attributes.headline
The United States Supreme Court Building

# data[].attributes.subject
The United States Supreme Court Building

# data[].attributes.body
Boarder Patrol Agent Cesar Cantu was checking the immigration status of passengers on a bus. He then squeezed the overhead bag of Steven Dewayne Bond's bag and felt a "brick-like" object. Bond admitted to owning the bag and consented to a search. It was then discovered there was a brick of meth.

Bond then argued that it was founded unconstitutionally

# data[].attributes.body
When Bond's bag was squeezed by Cantu, he felt a brick-like substance. Bond admitted to owning the bag and consented to its search. When the bag was searched, a brick of methamphetamine was found.

# data[].attributes.body
The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Bond that the search did violate Bond's 4th Amendment rights. The ruling was decided by William H. Rehnquist based on the ruling of Minnesota v. Dickerson.

# data[].attributes.body
The search was deemed illegal by the US Supreme Court in the year 2000.  Because the Border Patrol Agent manipulated the suitcase in a way that others on the bus could have without permission, it violated the 4th Amendment. Bond had a "privacy interest in his bag", and the Patrol Agent had no right to violate that interest. The ruling of this case was decided by using the ruling of similar case Minnesota vs. Dickerson. This case set the precedent that a bag or other item cannot be manipulated without probable cause or a warrant. This helps protect your privacy and therefore has legal significance.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chief Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist

# data[].attributes.subject
Chief Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist

# data[].attributes.body
The Chief Justice who heard this case and delivered the Court's decision

# data[].attributes.body
What was found in his bag
**(not the actual bricks, just a picture of some bricks of meth)

# data[].attributes.body
1. Oyez: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1999/98-9349
2. Justia:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/529/334/
3. Cornell University:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-9349.ZO.html